You can login if you already have an account or register by clicking the button below.
Registering is free and all you need is a username and password. We never ask you for your e-mail.
San Francisco resident here. Part of the problem is that rising rent trend is spreading across the entire Bay Area, especially anywhere connected to BART. The proverbial rich techie can move, but lower income people are fucked on multiple levels. The entire region is becoming unaffordable, and probably only another serious real estate crash will start to turn it back.
It's extreme gentrification. As long as there are people who can pay the high rents, there is no incentive to lower them. My friend in San Jose pays 2,400/m for a 1 bedroom apartment barely 900sq. It's a nice spot but not luxury by any means.
But the pay in San Jose is 50k more than the pay in Los Angeles or San Diego. Just a trade off, tech companies need tech people so they pay inflated salaries to allow their workers to live in the area.
Now if you don't work in tech or similar and make that tech money, you are definitely in for a rough time. Fortunately there are countless cities within a 100$ flight that are extremely cheap to live, hell, you can even live in Oakland if you prefer to stay in the area.
If rent costs more than 1/3rd of your income, you can no longer afford to live there and need to consider moving.
That's the rub. People are not realizing the COL index. Sure, "$70,000 in SF is equivalent to $30,000 in any other coastal CA city".....BUT.... and its a big but....The big difference is the buying power. $1 does not have the same buying power in SF as $1 has in SD. I lived in SF for six years and moved to SD last year. The quality of life differential is HUGE! I had a pretty sweet set up in SF because I moved in before the rent madness and my landlord did not raise rents. It was beautiful. Still, I couldn't drive my car everywhere because parking garages and meters were ridiculously priced. If I wanted I morning moca on my way to work I had to spend $5 (instead of the usual $3). And lunch? Forget it -- $10 just for a basic grab and go sandwich. $15 for a decent lunch. Sure, I could live in SF - but I couldn't enjoy it. Now I live in SD and ENJOY it. My husband and I have been living paycheck to paycheck this year and feel on top of the world. Most attractions are fee to residents, parking is free, and beaches to actually swim in. I would take SD over SF hands down all over again.
I wouldn't be surprised if we see an social network/app bubble in the next 5 years similar to the dot-com bubble of the early 2000s. The recent Twitter layoffs could be a sign of things to come.
view the rest of the comments →
[–] NorsteinBekkler 0 points 6 points 6 points (+6|-0) ago
San Francisco resident here. Part of the problem is that rising rent trend is spreading across the entire Bay Area, especially anywhere connected to BART. The proverbial rich techie can move, but lower income people are fucked on multiple levels. The entire region is becoming unaffordable, and probably only another serious real estate crash will start to turn it back.
[–] badp4nd4 0 points 2 points 2 points (+2|-0) ago
It's extreme gentrification. As long as there are people who can pay the high rents, there is no incentive to lower them. My friend in San Jose pays 2,400/m for a 1 bedroom apartment barely 900sq. It's a nice spot but not luxury by any means.
But the pay in San Jose is 50k more than the pay in Los Angeles or San Diego. Just a trade off, tech companies need tech people so they pay inflated salaries to allow their workers to live in the area.
Now if you don't work in tech or similar and make that tech money, you are definitely in for a rough time. Fortunately there are countless cities within a 100$ flight that are extremely cheap to live, hell, you can even live in Oakland if you prefer to stay in the area.
If rent costs more than 1/3rd of your income, you can no longer afford to live there and need to consider moving.
[–] Vvswiftvv17 ago
That's the rub. People are not realizing the COL index. Sure, "$70,000 in SF is equivalent to $30,000 in any other coastal CA city".....BUT.... and its a big but....The big difference is the buying power. $1 does not have the same buying power in SF as $1 has in SD. I lived in SF for six years and moved to SD last year. The quality of life differential is HUGE! I had a pretty sweet set up in SF because I moved in before the rent madness and my landlord did not raise rents. It was beautiful. Still, I couldn't drive my car everywhere because parking garages and meters were ridiculously priced. If I wanted I morning moca on my way to work I had to spend $5 (instead of the usual $3). And lunch? Forget it -- $10 just for a basic grab and go sandwich. $15 for a decent lunch. Sure, I could live in SF - but I couldn't enjoy it. Now I live in SD and ENJOY it. My husband and I have been living paycheck to paycheck this year and feel on top of the world. Most attractions are fee to residents, parking is free, and beaches to actually swim in. I would take SD over SF hands down all over again.
[–] spunker88 0 points 1 point 1 point (+1|-0) ago
I wouldn't be surprised if we see an social network/app bubble in the next 5 years similar to the dot-com bubble of the early 2000s. The recent Twitter layoffs could be a sign of things to come.
[–] weezkitty ago
Some of those prices really aren't that bad unless you are working a very low paying job.
Obviously $3500 is way too much but $1200-1500 should be manageable.